HARBANSLAL B GUPTA Vs. COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this reference at the instance of the assessee, the Tribunal has referred to this court only one question of law under Section 27(1) of the Wealth -tax Act, 1957. The question reads thus :

(2.) THE assessee is an individual and the proceedings relate to his assessment for the assessment year 1970 -71. The assessment was completed on January 31, 1973, in which the assessee's net wealth was computed at Rs. 10,38,660. The wealth, inter alia, comprised certain immovable properties which were mainly let out. Their market value was estimated by applying a multiple to the net income computed for income -tax purposes. However, there was no mention, far less a discussion, about the payment of the assessee's share of tax under the Bombay Building Repairs and Reconstruction Board Act, 1969, as such. The relevant order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner is not annexed to the statement of the case nor is it otherwise made available to us. It is thus not clear whether any claim in that regard was at all made before the Wealth -tax Officer or the Appellate Assistant Commissioner.

(3.) IT is submitted before us by the assessee who appeared in person that, under 4. Section 24(1)(vii) of the Income -tax Act, he was entitled to deduction from the annual letting value of any sum paid on account of land revenue or any other tax levied by the State Government in respect of the property. This deduction, according to him, was over and above the deduction allowable in respect of repairs under Section 24(1)(i) of the Act. Shri Jetley, on the other hand, stated that the assessee was allowed a hypothetical deduction in respect of repairs under Section 24(1)(i) which was far in excess of the claim made by him. Therefore, the net income from the property could not be further reduced by the actual burden of tax suffered by the assessee under the aforesaid Act. In any event, according to Shri Jetley, the multiplier applied to the net income from the property computed under the Income -tax Act was a sound basis and did not call for any interference.